Chest CT scan plus x-ray versus chest x-ray for the follow-up of completely resected non-small-cell lung cancer (IFCT-0302): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Even after resection of early-stage non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), patients have a high risk of developing recurrence and second primary lung cancer. We aimed to assess efficacy of a follow-up approach including clinic visits, chest x-rays, chest CT scans, and fibre-optic bronchoscopy versus clinical visits and chest x-rays after surgery for resectable NSCLC. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial (IFCT-0302), patients aged 18 years or older and after complete resection of pathological stage I-IIIA NSCLC according to the sixth edition of the TNM classification were enrolled within 8 weeks of resection from 122 hospitals and tertiary centres in France. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to CT-based follow-up (clinic visits, chest x-rays, thoraco-abdominal CT scans, and fibre-optic bronchoscopy for non-adenocarcinoma histology) or minimal follow-up (visits and chest x-rays) after surgery for NSCLC, by means of a computer-generated sequence using the minimisation method. Procedures were repeated every 6 months for the first 2 years and yearly until 5 years. The primary endpoint was overall survival analysed in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints, also analysed in the intention-to-treat population, included disease-free survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00198341, and is active, but not enrolling. FINDINGS: Between Jan 3, 2005, and Nov 30, 2012, 1775 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to a follow-up group (888 patients to the minimal follow-up group; 887 patients to the CT-based follow-up group). Median overall survival was not significantly different between follow-up groups (8·5 years [95% CI 7·4-9·6] in the minimal follow-up group vs 10·3 years [8·1-not reached] in the CT-based follow-up group; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·95, 95% CI 0·83-1·10; log-rank p=0·49). Disease-free survival was not significantly different between follow-up groups (median not reached [95% CI not estimable-not estimable] in the minimal follow-up group vs 4·9 [4·3-not reached] in the CT-based follow-up group; adjusted HR 1·14, 95% CI 0·99-1·30; log-rank p=0·063). Recurrence was detected in 246 (27·7%) of 888 patients in the minimal follow-up group and in 289 (32·6%) patients of 887 in the CT-based follow-up group. Second primary lung cancer was diagnosed in 27 (3·0%) patients in the minimal follow-up group and 40 patients (4·5%) in the CT-based follow-up group. No serious adverse events related to the trial procedures were reported. INTERPRETATION: The addition of thoracic CT scans during follow-up, which included clinic visits and chest x-rays after surgery, did not result in longer survival among patients with NSCLC. However, it did enable the detection of more cases of early recurrence and second primary lung cancer, which are more amenable to curative-intent treatment, supporting the use of CT-based follow-up, especially in countries where lung cancer screening is already implemented, alongside with other supportive measures. FUNDING: French Health Ministry, French National Cancer Institute, Weisbrem-Benenson Foundation, La Ligue Nationale Contre Le Cancer, and Lilly Oncology. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Weekly paclitaxel plus bevacizumab versus docetaxel as second- or third-line treatment in advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer: Results of the IFCT-1103 ULTIMATE study.

PURPOSE: Second-line chemotherapy regimens have demonstrated poor benefit after failure of platinum-based chemotherapy in advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (nsNSCLC). METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label phase III trial, patients with advanced nsNSCLC treated with one or two prior lines, including one platinum-based doublet, were centrally randomised to receive 90 mg/m2 of paclitaxel (D1, D8, D15) plus 10 mg/kg of bevacizumab (D1, D15) every 28 days or docetaxel (75 mg/m2) every 21 days; crossover was allowed after disease progression. Primary end-point was progression-free survival (PFS). ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT01763671. RESULTS: One hundred sixty six patients were randomised (paclitaxel plus bevacizumab: 111, docetaxel: 55). The median PFS was longer in patients receiving paclitaxel plus bevacizumab than in patients receveing docetaxel [5·4 months versus 3·9 months, adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0·61 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0·44-0·86); p = 0·005]. Objective response rates (ORRs) were 22·5% (95% CI: 14·8-30·3) and 5·5% (95% CI: 0·0-11·5) (p = 0·006), respectively. Median overall survivals were similar (adjusted HR 1·17; p = 0·50). Crossover occurred in 21 of 55 (38·2%) docetaxel-treated patients. Grade III-IV adverse events (AEs) were reported in 45·9% and 54·5% of patients treated with paclitaxel and bevacizumab or docetaxel, respectively (p = NS), including neutropenia (19·3% versus 45·4%), neuropathy (8·3% versus 0·0%) and hypertension (7·3% versus 0·0%). Three patients died due to treatment-related AEs (1·8% in each group). CONCLUSION: Weekly paclitaxel plus bevacizumab as second- or third-line improves PFS and ORR compared with docetaxel in patients with nsNSCLC, with an acceptable safety profile. These results place weekly paclitaxel plus bevacizumab as a valid option in this population. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01763671.

New insights into stage and prognosis in small cell lung cancer: an analysis of 968 cases.

BACKGROUND: The French College of General Hospital Respiratory Physicians conducted two studies that consecutively included all patients followed in participating general hospitals for primary small cell (SCLC) or non-small cell (NSCLC) lung cancer diagnosed in 2000 and 2010. These studies allow descriptive statistics and outcome assessment for SCLC and NSCLC separately and comparison over a 10-year period. METHODS: A standardised form was completed for each patient at inclusion. Then, vital status was collected. RESULTS: In 2000 and 2010, 948 (15.5% female) and 968 (23.3%) SCLC patients, mainly heavy active- or former-smoker seniors, participated in these studies. One-year survival rate was 35.8% for SCLC vs. 44.8% for NSCLC in 2010 and 33.1% for SCLC in 2000. In 2010, in reference to stage 0-IIB (4.1% of SCLCs), the hazard ratio was 0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.6-1.5; P=0.76], 1.8 (95% CI: 1.1-2.8; P=0.019), and 3.4 (95% CI: 2.2-5.3; P<0.001) for stage IIIA (10.2%), IIIB (14.5%), and IV (71.2%). Positron emission tomography (PET)-scan use, which has increased in 10 years, was frequent in patients with limited disease. CONCLUSIONS: One-year survival in SCLC patients was poor in 2010 and dependent of SCLC stage. TNM classification reintroduction and new diagnostic techniques (e.g., PET-scan) should allow lung oncologists to tailor treatment based on disease stage at diagnosis.